The article seemed very sympathetic to the people killed and injured to me, giving multiple accounts from their perspective and that of their families, etc. But this is the equivalent, at best, of a crowd descending on a crashed Brinks truck to snatch up spilled cash and then having the armored car's fuel tank explode on them. They subjected themselves to extraordinary danger to take what didn't belong to them and paid the price for it. I'd consider the moral ledger to be balanced.
Except the gas that was spilling out of the pipe was never going to be recovered and used for anything else - nothing of value was being stolen. For people in extreme poverty, the money they gain from gas could significantly affect their lives, I don't blame them for trying to take it.
